Unbundling of the vertically integrated undertakings - fulfilling requirements of the Electricity and Gas Directive. Myth or reality?In many EU countries electricity networks/gas pipelines are still properties of the so called vertically integrated undertakings (VIU) responsible for the generation/extraction, supply, transmission and/or distribution of the energy. Whereas competition can be promoted in the generation/production and supply side of the vertically integrated companies, transmission and distribution segments remain natural monopolies on which market mechanisms are to some extent hindered. Vertical integration simply raises the possibility for incumbents to favor their own divisions and to block new entrants. As a result the European Commission within the Electricity and Gas Directives proposed to separate form the VIU network operators, consequently transmission system operators responsible for transmission activities and distribution system operators responsible for distribution. This was supposed to be achieved at three levels: unbundling of accounts, functional (managerial) and legal unbundling. Unfortunately practical, domestic execution of the unbundling provisions is still unfinished matter. In many cases current unbundling provisions implemented into national legislations simply do not remove incentive for cross subsidization or discrimination against competitors regarding third party access (TPA). In this case the most feasible solution as well as motivation for system operators to operate, maintain and develop networks in the interest of all market players would be the unbundling of assets or basically ownership unbundling.

Hubert Skwarczyński

Interwencja w postępowaniu karnym skarbowym

Intervention in the penal revenue codeThe publication titled "Intervention in the penal revenue code" highlights issues of typical and specyfic institution of penal revenue law. Intervention is a claim which definite subject may have in relation to properties subjected to forfeiture in the penal revenue proceedings. The subject which comes out with a claim is a party to the proceedings. He/she mustn`t be eighter a suspected or accused. The party to this proceedings may be not only natural person, but also corporate body or organizational form without legel status. Both corporate body and organizational form without legal status may be represented by representative of collective subject or plenipotentiary. Notification of intervention should take place until the legal proceedings in the first instance commence. After the deadline, until which the intervention is not notified, the authorized subject, fulfiling definite condition, may come out with a claim towards the State Treasury because of groundlessly enrichement. Authorization within the bounds of intervention is vested in this subject in the course of proceedings. In this case he/she has also the right to appeal against a sentence of the first instance and even the opportunity to apply a special medium of prosecution.

Comments to the article 418 of Polish Commercial Code. Subjective and objective prerequisites of a squeeze out in private joint-stock companiesThe text concerns institution of a squeeze out in Polish private joint-stock companies. The consequence of application of analysed institution is a loss by the expelled stockholders of the status of stockholder against their will. In connection with such far reaching interference in rights of expelled stockholders, it is necessary to examine in detail subjective and objective prerequisites of the squeeze out. Subjective prerequisites are related to majority stockholders as well as stockholders, whose shares are the object of the squeeze out. Moreover, the object of the analysis in aspect of subjective prerequisites of the squeeze out are the probative issue in matter of the fulfilment of the circumstances defined by the law and special situation of stockholder, who represents exactly 5% of the company's capital. In the article there is also an analysis of objective prerequisites of the squeeze out in Polish private joint-stock companies which are: passing the resolution by the general meeting of stockholders (including so-called "buy-out plan"), carrying out valuation of shares which are compulsory discarded, the payment of the whole sum of the buy-out by the majority stockholders (including the money needed for buying out shares submitted to the buy-out within the framework of a reverse squeeze out), buying out the shares to the majority stockholders' account by hand of the board of directors, handing out share certificates to the majority stockholders (alternatively handing out new share certificates in place of annulled ones). In resume there are indicated defects and deficiencies of Polish regulations concerning the squeeze out in private joint-stock companies in aspect of subjective and objective prerequisites. There are also comments de lege ferenda.

Prawo własności intelektualnej

Bartłomiej Braun

Utwór współautorski

Work of joint authorshipThe aim of the article is to attempt to create a definition of the work of joint authorship, created very often as a work of many people of whom only some can be called as its joint authors. In my opinion the work of joint authorship is a work of a numerous group of authors acting as one, initiated by their agreement (which cannot be understood as a civil contract), that in practice is fulfilled in particular by the input of the creative contribution. Within the agreement the authors express at least the will of creation of the new work, in accordance with common idea and under common control. This new work is separated from the contribution created individually and brought into that work by its coauthors. The creation of work of joint authorship is generally the act of creative adjusting contributive works, created on the base of the agreement in such a way, that their transformation constitutes individual expression which can be treated as a new work of art, distinguished from all the creative contributions that it is made of. All the creative contributions should be at least recognisable in the work of joint authorship and although they are included in the work of joint authorship they do not lose their autonomy. The matter of size, proportion of the creative contribution in the joint work, ability of being used beyond the work of joint authorship or the question whether they belong to the different art areas or not, is for creation of the work of joint authorship meaningless. It is important however, that every creative contribution influences the whole work of joint authorship according to its content and form. The work of the joint authorship is being completed at the time of mutual approval of its final version made by all of its coauthors. Since that moment we can talk about one subject of copyright, to which primarily more than one person claims the right.